alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.1
CSB BANCORP, INC.
EXHIBIT 31.1
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification
President and Chief Executive Officer
I, John J. Limbert, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of CSBBancorp, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respectto the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and c) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):
44.
 

 

CSB BANCORP, INC.
a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarizeand report financial information; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: August 6, 2004    /s/ John J. Limbert   John J. Limbert President and Chief Executive Officer
45.
# C_2020019EN.01004002.xml

| 20.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/40

---

Order of the President of the Court of 29 August 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus — Finland) — Proceedings brought by Nobina Finland Oy

(Case C-327/19) (1)

(2020/C 19/46)

Language of the case: Finnish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 220, 1.7.2019.

---
**Exhibit 10.30**

 

**FIFTHAMENDMENT**

**OFTHE**

**SKY FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. PROFIT SHARING, 401(K) AND ESOPPLAN**

(As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2004) 

 

**WHEREAS********,**Sky Financial Group, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Sky Financial Group, Inc. Profit Sharing, 401(k) and ESOP Plan (the “Plan”); and 

 

**WHEREAS********,** the Company has delegated authority to amend the Plan to the Sky FinancialGroup, Inc. Benefit Plans Committee (the “Committee”), and the Committee has determined that amendment of the Plan is necessary and desirable. 

 

**NOW, THEREFORE********,** pursuant to the power reserved to the Company by Section10.01 of the Plan, and by virtue of the authority delegated to the Committee, the Plan, as previously amended, is hereby further amended, in the following particulars, effective March 27, 2005: 

 

1.      By rescindingparticulars 2 through 4 of the Fourth Amendment of the Plan, which shall be void and of no effect. 

 

2.       By substituting the figure “$1,000” for “$5,000” where the latter appears in the first paragraph of Section 5.05 of the Plan.

 

3.      Bydeleting the last sentence of the first paragraph of Section 5.05 of the Plan. 

 

4.      By substituting the figure “$1,000” for “$5,000” where the latter appears in the first paragraph of Section 6.01 of the Plan. 

 

5.      By deleting the lastsentence of the first paragraph of Section 6.01 of the Plan. 

 

6.      By substituting the figure “$1,000” for “$5,000” where the latter appears in the second paragraph of Section 6.04(c) of the Plan. 

 

*        *        * 

 

[signature page to follow] 

**IN WITNESSWHEREOF********,** on behalf of the Committee, the undersigned Committee member has executed this amendment this 8th day of March 2005. 

 

**SKY FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.**

**BENEFIT PLANS COMMITTEE**

By:
 
/s/ Thomas A. Sciorilli

Its:
 
Chief Human Resources Officer

 

 

- 2 -
Order entered October 2 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 14
- 01388
- CV
PREMIER POOLS MANAGE MENT CORP. AND SHAN POOLS, INC.

D/B/A PREMIER POOLS AND SPAS, Appellant s V. PREMIER POOLS, INC., Appellee On Appeal fro m the 101st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 12
- 07182



### O RDER
We GRANT appellee’s October 1, 2015 third motion for an extension of time to file a
brief TO THE EXTENT that appellee shall file a brief by OCTOBER 22, 2015

. We caution appellee that no further extension of time will be granted.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
EXAMPLE: OWNER / HAULER STATEMENT FOR SHEEP AND GOATS

OWNER NAME AND ADDRESS DESTINATION NAME AND ADDRESS

Name: Name:

Address: Address:

City/State/Zip: City/State/Zip:

Phone: Phone:

HAULER NAME AND ADDRESS Date Animals Moved:

Name:

Address: Scrapie Flock ID or PIN*:

*Premises ID Number

City/State/Zip:

Phone:

ANIMAL INFORMATION

Number of 

Animals

Sheep or 

Goats

Breed

(If unknown: For sheep, include 

face color; for goat, include

type: milk, meat, fiber)

Class

(Cull ewes/does, rams/bucks,

feeder lambs/kids, slaughter lambs/kids, etc.)

Group Lot ID Number

(Flock ID—MMDDYY— 

sequence number)

 

 These animals are in slaughter channels.

Owner/Hauler Signature:

I hereby certify that the information stated above is correct and the livestock listed are properly classified.
#### Wallace BAER, Appellant, v. ALYESKA EAST CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, Appellee.

No. 1995.

Supreme Court of Alaska.

March 11, 1974.

Millard F. Ingraham and Joseph W. Sheehan, of Rice, Hoppner, Blair & Associates, Fairbanks, for appellant.

*462John W. Pletcher, III, of Merdes, Schai-ble, Staley & DeLisio, Anchorage, for ap-pellee.

OPINION

Before RABINOWITZ, C. J., and ERWIN, BOOCHEVER and FITZGERALD, JJ., and MOODY, Superior Court Judge.

PER CURIAM.

This case involves an appeal from a grant of summary judgment in the trial court. A review of the entire record herein discloses that the trial court wo.; correct in granting summary judgment on the 1⁄8 sis of the record and issues presented to it.

The judgment of the superior court is affirmed.

CONNOR, J., not participating.
# C_2020230EN.01001002.xml

| 13.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 230/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 230/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 23 April 2020 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Germany) — Deutsche Homöopathie-Union (DHU) Arzneimittel GmbH & Co. KG v Bundesrepublik Deutschland

(Joined Cases C-101/19 and C-102/19) (1)

(References for a preliminary ruling - Medicinal products for human use - Directive 2001/83/EC - Articles 62 and 69 - Particulars on the labelling and package leaflet of homeopathic medicinal products - Exhaustive list of the particulars or possibility to add information that is useful to the patient and is compatible with the summary of product characteristics - Dosage schedules for homeopathic medicinal products)

(2020/C 230/13)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant, appellant and appellant on a point of law: Deutsche Homöopathie-Union (DHU) Arzneimittel GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant, respondent and respondent in the appeal on a point of law: Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Operative part of the judgment

Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, as modified by Directive 2004/27/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004, must be interpreted as precluding the package leaflet referred to in Article 69 thereof from including information other than that listed in that provision, in particular dosage schedules for homeopathic medicinal products covered by that provision.

---

(1)  OJ C 172, 20.5.2019.

---
EXHIBIT 23
                                                                      ----------



                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT




         We  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in the  registration
statements of Interneuron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-58742,
33-76652,  33-94730  and  33-94736)  and on Form  S-3  (33-75826,  33-32408  and
333-1273)  of  our  report  dated  November  13,  1996  on  our  audits  of  the
consolidated  financial  statement of  Interneuron  Pharmaceuticals,  Inc. as of
September  30, 1995 and 1996 and for each of the three years in the period ended
September 30, 1996,  which report is included in the Annual Report on Form 10- K
of  Interneuron  Pharmaceuticals,  Inc. for the fiscal year ended  September 30,
1996.





                                                   /s/ Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
                                                   ----------------------------
                                                   Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.

Boston, Massachusetts
December 16, 1996
February 20, 1998

19668

#### State v. Springer

Affirmed
# C_2019413EN.01005201.xml

| 9.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 413/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 413/52

---

Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2019 — Reaktor Group v EUIPO (REAKTOR)

(Case T-650/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark REAKTOR - Absolute grounds for refusal - Lack of descriptive character - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Direct and specific relationship with the goods and services covered by the trade mark application)

(2019/C 413/62)

Language of the case: Finnish

Parties

Applicant: Reaktor Group Oy (Helsinki, Finland) (represented by L. Laaksonen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: K. Kompari, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 August 2018 (Case R 2626/2017-2), relating to an application for registration of the word sign REAKTOR as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 August 2018 (Case R 2626/2017-2) in so far as, by that decision, the Board of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s action on the basis of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation 2017/1001; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 August 2018 (Case R 2626/2017-2) in so far as, by that decision, the Board of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s action on the basis of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation 2017/1001;

| 2. | Orders EUIPO to pay the costs, including the unavoidable costs incurred by Reaktor Group Oy for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders EUIPO to pay the costs, including the unavoidable costs incurred by Reaktor Group Oy for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

---

(1)  OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.

---
Exhibit








AMENDMENT TO THE
BROADCOM CORPORATION
2012 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN


February 1, 2016
This Amendment (this “Amendment”) to the Broadcom Corporation 2012 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended and restated January 28, 2015 (as amended, the “Plan”) is effective as of the date first set forth above, such amendment being approved by the Board of Directors of Broadcom Limited (the “Company”) pursuant to Article Five, Section IV.A of the Plan.  The Plan is hereby amended as follows:
		
	1.
	All references to the “Corporation,” “Broadcom Corporation” or “Broadcom Corporation, a California corporation” in the Plan shall refer to the Company.  The following will replace Section F of the Appendix to the Plan in its entirety: 


“F.  Corporation shall mean Broadcom Limited (Registration No. 201505572G), a limited company incorporated under the Republic of Singapore.”
		
	2.
	All references to “stock,” “common stock,” “shares of common stock” or other similar terms in the Plan shall refer to the ordinary shares of the Corporation. All references to “shares of Common Stock,” “Class A Common Stock” or “Common Stock” in the Plan shall be deleted and replaced with “Shares”.   


		
	3.
	The following will replace Section E of the Appendix of the Plan in its entirety:  


“E.    Shares means the ordinary shares of the Company, no par value.”  
		
	4.
	The following will replace Article One, Section V.A of the Plan in its entirety:


“A.  The shares issuable under the Plan shall be shares of authorized but unissued Shares, including shares repurchased by the Corporation on the open market.  Subject to the automatic share increase provisions of Section V.B. of this Article One and any additional shares authorized by the vote of the Board and approved by the shareholders, the number of Shares reserved for issuance under the Plan from and after February 1, 2016 shall not exceed 85,222,200 shares.” 
		
	5.
	The following will replace Article One, Section V.B of the Plan in its entirety:


“B.  The number of Shares available for issuance under the Plan shall automatically increase on the first trading day of January each calendar year during the term of the Plan, commencing on the first trading day of January of calendar year 2017, by 12,195,965 Shares.”  








1





		
	6.
	The following will replace Article One, Section V.C of the Plan in its entirety:


“C.  No one person participating in the Plan may be granted Awards for more than 3,956,992 Shares in the aggregate per calendar year.”
		
	7.
	The following will replace Article Four of the Plan in its entirety:


“ARTICLE FOUR
[Intentionally Omitted.]”
		
	8.
	All references to Article Four of the Plan and to the “Director Automatic Grant Program” will be deleted in their entirety.  The following will replace Section H of the Appendix of the Plan in its entirety: 


“H.  [Intentionally Omitted.]”
		
	9.
	Except as provided in this Amendment, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.




*    *    *     *    *
#### Errol R. SIMMONS, Appellant, v. Christine J. SIMMONS, Appellee. Christine J. SIMMONS, Cross-Appellant, v. Errol R. SIMMONS, Cross-Appellee.

Nos. 2042, 2045.

Supreme Court of Alaska.

May 17, 1974.

Allen J. Jewell, Hahn, Jewell & Stanfill, Anchorage, for appellant and cross-appel-lee.

*172Peter Labate, Anchorage, for appellee and cross-appellant.

Before RABINOWITZ, C. J., and CONNOR, ERWIN, BOOCHEVER and FITZGERALD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This matter comes before us on appeal and cross-appeal from a property division ordered by the superior court following the divorce of the parties.

After careful review of the record in light of the claimed errors, we conclude that in dividing the property owned by the parties the trial court did not abuse its discretion. Moore v. Moore, 499 P.2d 300 (Alaska 1972); Ross v. Ross, 496 P.2d 662 (Alaska 1972); Vanover v. Vanover, 496 P.2d 644 (Alaska 1965); Groff v. Groff, 408 P.2d 998 (Alaska 1965); McSmith v. McSmith, 387 P.2d 454 (Alaska 1963); Crume v. Crume, 378 P.2d 183 (Alaska 1963); Rhodes v. Rhodes, 370 P.2d 902 (Alaska 1962); Merrill v. Merrill, 368 P. 2d 546 (Alaska 1962).

The decision of the superior court is affirmed.
H. Res. 8 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 6, 2015. 

Resolved, That pursuant to the Legislative Pay Act of 

1929, as amended, the six minority employees authorized 

therein shall be the following named persons, effective January 6, 2015, until otherwise ordered by the House, to-wit: 

Nadeam Elshami, George Kundanis, Diane Dewhirst, Richard Meltzer, Wyndee Parker, and Drew Hammill, each to receive gross compensation pursuant to the provisions of House 

Resolution 119, Ninety-fifth Congress, as enacted into permanent law by section 115 of Public Law 95–94. In addition, 

the Minority Leader may appoint and set the annual rate of 

pay for up to 3 further minority employees. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
# C_2021053EN.01000801.xml

| 15.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 53/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 53/8

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 December 2020 — Fabio De Masi, Yanis Varoufakis v European Central Bank

(Case C-342/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Access to European Central Bank (ECB) documents - Decision 2004/258/EC - Article 4(3) - Exceptions - Document received by the ECB - Opinion from an external service provider - Internal use as part of deliberations and preliminary consultations - Refusal to grant access)

(2021/C 53/08)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellants: Fabio De Masi, Yanis Varoufakis (represented by: A. Fischer-Lescano, Universitätsprofessor)

Other party to the proceedings: European Central Bank (represented by: F. von Lindeiner and A. Korb, acting as Agents, and by H.-G. Kamann, Rechtsanwalt)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Fabio de Masi and Yanis Varoufakis to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Fabio de Masi and Yanis Varoufakis to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 280, 19.8.2019.

---
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, J r. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk January 29, 2010

s0125 

# Order

January 29, 2010

140039

BANK OF AMERICA N.A. f/k/a AMERICA’S WHOLESALE LENDER, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 140039 COA: 292026 Kent CC: 08-000106-NZ WEST COAST REALTY, INC., BRIAN SILVERNAIL, and MICHELE SILVERNAIL, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 8, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Safeguarding American Agriculture

Federal Relay Service

APHIS is an agency of USDA’s Marketing and Regulatory Programs (Voice/TTY/ASCII/Spanish)

 An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer 1-800-877-8339

August 3, 2009 

CENTER FOR VETERINARY BIOLOGICS NOTICE NO. 09-17 

TO: Biologics Licensees, Permittees, and Applicants 

Directors, Center for Veterinary Biologics 

Veterinary Services Management Team 

FROM: Richard E. Hill, Jr. /s/ Byron E. Rippke, for 

Director 

Center for Veterinary Biologics 

SUBJECT: Accepting Product License Applications for Epizootic Hemorrhagic 

Disease Vaccine 

I. PURPOSE

The purpose of this notice is to inform interested parties that the Center for Veterinary 

Biologics (CVB) is accepting veterinary biologics product license and permit applications 

for Epizootic Hemorrhagic Disease Vaccine. 

II. BACKGROUND

Epizootic hemorrhagic disease virus (EHDV) serotypes 1 and 2 have been implicated in 

epizootics of white-tailed deer in the United States and Canada, with serotype 2 most 

often implicated. Serotype 6 has been identified from samples collected in several states 

of the United States. The EHDVs belong to the genus Orbivirus, family Reoviridae. 

EHDV is transmitted via a Culicoides biting fly or midge. Epizootic hemorrhagic disease 

(EHD) can have severe disease impacts in wild and captive white-tailed deer. 

III. ACTION

The CVB will consider license, including conditional license, and permit applications for 

Epizootic Hemorrhagic Disease Vaccine. The Serotypes of the included acceptable 

fractions are limited to those isolated from animals naturally infected in the United States. 

Interested parties should refer to Title 9, Code of Federal Regulations, Subchapter E; 

Veterinary Services Memorandum (VS Memo) 800.50, Basic License Requirements for 

Applicants; and VS Memo 800.101, U.S. Veterinary Biological Product Permits for 

Distribution and Sale. This information is available on the CVB website: 

www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/vet_biologics/vb_regs_and_guidance.shtml

Applications and supporting materials should be submitted to the CVB-Policy, 

Evaluation, and Licensing for review. 

United States 

Department of 

Agriculture

Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection 

Service 

Veterinary Services 

Center for Veterinary 

Biologics 

1920 Dayton Avenue 

P.O. Box 844 

Ames, IA 50010 

(515) 337-6100

ARCHIVED
Dismiss and Opinion Filed February 5, 2015 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-00691-CV ROBERT RAMIREZ, Appellant V. MARTIN SALAMANCA, DEADHEAD PROPANE GAS, INC., ET AL., Appellees On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-13-10069 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justi ce Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright Appellant’s brief in this case is overdue . By postcard dated September 26, 2014, we notified appellant the time for filing his brief had e xpired. We directed appellant to file both his brief and an extension motion within ten days. We cautioned appellant that failure to file a brief
and an extension motion would result in the dismissa l of this appeal without further notice. To date, appellant has not filed a brief, filed an extension moti on, or otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the stat us of this appeal.
A ccordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8(a)(1); 42.3(b)(c).

140691F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–2– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
ROBERT RAMIREZ, Appellant
No. 05-14-00691-CV V.
MARTIN SALAMANCA, DEADHEAD PROPANE GAS, INC., ET AL., Appellees On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-13-10069. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart participating. In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellees MARTIN SA LAMANCA, DEADHEAD PROPANE GAS, INC., DEADHEAD MESQUITE, INC., GIBSON ENERGY, LLC, TAYLOR LOGISTICS, LLC, TAYLOR COMPANIES, LL C, TAYLOR PROPANE GAS, INC., TPG TRANSPORT, LLC AND TP G LEASING, LLC recover their costs of this appeal from appellant ROBERT RAMIREZ.
Judgment entered February 5, 2015.